What saddens me about the "bank bonus" debate is that this fatuous topic has diverted attention from the core issues.
The reality is that 99% of all the bonuses being paid or contemplated are being paid to relatively low-paid banking workers who thoroughly deserve their bonuses. This is a part of their salary and is thoroughly deserved, and they should not be made scape-goats.
A relatively small amount is being paid to senior execs and non-retail banking speculators ie traders. The venom directed to this last group is detracting from the bigger picture. The select committee hearing two days ago was so tainted by this single issue that I cannot see what they learned from it.
A relatively few banking traders and senior execs should be prevented from getting any of their normal bonuses and I think prosecution avenues should be evaluated. But let's not dishearten all of the decent employees - also victims of this - of the banks by making them feel that this bonus issue is about them.
Maybe, but think of the numbers (sorry my PC doesn't have pounds but all these number are UKL) - RBS is 2 billion / 160,000 employees = 12,500 per head on average. OK, so a big percentage of the 160,000 are in retail banking and relatively lowly paid. What is the UK average income? That 12,500 is a darn big percentage, so where is the money going?
It doesn't alter the fact that for employees in most businesses don't have the luxury of being able to blow through their investors money, then get HUGE amounts of money to tide them over from Taxpayers who have zero choice before next May.
Those poor suckers, including the folks in Ford, long ago lost any thought of a bonus and are struggling, striking even, to try to hold on to their jobs. Why should any retail Bank staff get bonuses funded by UK Taxpayers when Ford and BA and employees of a million small businesses get nothing? How on earth did we allow them this special position?